During the early stages of the United States, two political parties emerged disagreeing with each other of who should have the power and what kind of government the nation should be composed of. The Federalist party wanted a strong national government and was thought to have a loose interpretation of the Constitution through the Elastic Clause. Onthe other hand, the Jeffersonian Republican party maintained that the states should retain the power and thought that the Elastic clause allowed the national govt too much power. They were know as the strict constructionists. Although the Republicans maintained this characterization at the beginning, the two parties exchanged their roles with each other during the presidencies of Jefferson and Madison, either because of certain political and foreign circumstances or ironically to make sure that the other party loses its power. Republicans maintained themselves as strict at the beginning of Jefferson's presidency. Thomas Jefferson believed that the states or people should have the power and that a so diverse country could not be controlled by one single government (doc A) because it would lead to a monarchy where the people dont have the right to speak. In short he believed that a national government should be needed whenever a war appear in order to defend themselves just like the revious Articles of Confederation. On the other hand, the Republicans changed their perspectives once facing certain political, foreign and religious problems and this caused a change concerning their strict interpretation of the Constitution. Republicans, who did not accept the Elastic Clause, started making use of it. For example, the Louisiana purchase was thought to be unconstitutional but president Thomas Jefferson argued that it was a very beneficial territory, making this his argument for the government to come and accept it. The people lost their right of protection during the republican presidency because they made use of the
Interpretation of the Constitution
Thomas Jefferson’s (president through 1801-09) political party, the Jeffersonian Republicans, believed in a strict interpretation of the Constitution, while Jefferson’s opposing party, the Federalists, believed in a loose interpretation of the Constitution. In order to comprehend the clear distinction between the two parties it is imperative to analyze the events during Thomas Jefferson’s presidency and James Madison’s presidency. The Democratic Republican Party….
The Constitution should be interpreted based on the current times and events. The interpretation of the Constitution in the past was unlawful in so many ways. There are still unratified amendments pending right now because they are unconstitutional. The method of interpretation might frame how political elites and the public at large view the court’s decision, as well as influence the court’s ability to avoid charges of judicial activism (Nardi, Jr., 2014). There were a lot of Jim Crow laws that….
Should the interpretation of law be strict or loose?
Law can be understood differently by a different variety of people who apply if different whether it’s strictly, loosely and everything in between. I believe that the interpretation of law shouldn’t be really strict, but shouldn’t be very loose at the same time. I believe that the interpretation of law should be in the middle of strict and loose. If the interpretation of law is loose, then people will just go around it and find their way out….
May 22, 2013
The Founding Fathers of the United States created a masterpiece. They were able to create a government held together by a Constitution that was run by the people, and was also able to keep the government in check by building a system that was able to change with time. The Founding Fathers were able to pull this off because they understood that human nature has not changed through history, and that people will look to tear down others in order….
Unlike the Federalists, who were broad constructionists, Jeffersonian Republicans are usually characterized as strict constructionists. With respect to the federal Constitution, Jeffersonian Republicans are for the “strict” interpretation of the Constitution, while the Federalist Party and its supporters are in favor of the “loose” interpretation. However, during the period of 1801-1817, this characterization of Jefferson’s and Madison’s views began to differ. The Democrat Republicans almost switched….
Strict vs. Broad Interpretation
During both Jefferson’s and Madison’s presidential term, both the Republicans’ and the Federalists’ ideals did not always stay consistent to their previous, more defined beliefs. Jefferson felt it necessary during his presidency to restore the states’ rights that the Federalists previously took away, but he also considered what was good and beneficial to the nation, even if a few of the ideas were not strictly constitutional. During Madison’s presidency, while….
I learned the following three things from this article: the constitution interpretation, power, and media. There is always a debate whether the constitution is supposed to be interpreted as a living document or what it literally states. The same issue occurred in this public policy issue. The power the government has is another theme brought up in the article. The government has the power to make sure states follow instruction on how to upheld the law or loss of funding would occur. Also, the power….
parties of Democratic Republican and Federalists extended both strict and loose characterizations of the constitution, that shows the presidencies of Jefferson and Madison were not as much of a stereotype. The Democratic Republicans had many ways of being strict through the constitution and a couple ways of being loose. Along with the Democratic Republicans the Federalists were more strict than loose when it came to the constitution and together both the Democratic Republicans and Federalists shows hoe….
With respect to the federal Constitution, the Democratic-Republicans were usually characterized as strict constructionists who were opposed to the broad constructionism of the Federalists. As history dictates, this is substantially accurate. In the time frame of 1801-1817, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, the Republican presidents of the time, demonstrated the differences of the Republican Party in several aspects involving the interpretation of the Constitution. The Democratic-Republicans believed….
Role of preamble in the interpretation of the Indian Constitution
Constitution is a legal document having a special legal sanctity, which sets out the framework and the principal functions of the organs of the government of a state, and declares the principles governing the operation of those organs. No reading of any constitution can be complete without reading it from the beginning to the end. While….